I still have to play a game which restricted me once i upgraded to gold or platinum in F2P titles. I haven't come across any so far. Mind giving me an example? maybe i missed something?
LOTRO.
Let me guess... expansions don't count?
So are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? because i ahve been tryign to draw parallels between B2P and P2P models. In both models you pay for expansions.
By the way by restriction i meant that the content that is already paid for before games goes F2P and not the future expansions.
I love F2P because it is basically an "idiot tax" payment model. I have the self control to play a game and not constantly spend money on stupid cosmetic items so it means those who can't control themselves pay for me. I used to have friends in WoW who paid to change their name every month or were constantly faction or server transferring their toons and I was just baffled at how they could waste money like that. So if those people want to pay for my content then I am all for it. The only time I oppose F2P is when it is pay to win because then it isn't really a game anymore.
WOW is not a F2P or a P2W game. And also it is not a advantage cash shop game... The CS in WOW is only for cosmetics. You cant compare that with a real F2P with a very offensive advantage CS. If you play a game like that without using the CS you will be forced to do terrible boring grinding. And spend more time doing boring things in general. And you will be both less powerful and have terrible gear compared to others that are spending a lot of money. Playing a game like that without paying is a painful waste of time. If you are paying enough to have some fun it is a waste of money instead, IMO. That business model is just bad. For everyone... My choice is to just say "no" and refuse to play games like that.
I still have to play a game which restricted me once i upgraded to gold or platinum in F2P titles. I haven't come across any so far. Mind giving me an example? maybe i missed something?
LOTRO.
Let me guess... expansions don't count?
So are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? because i ahve been tryign to draw parallels between B2P and P2P models. In both models you pay for expansions.
By the way by restriction i meant that the content that is already paid for before games goes F2P and not the future expansions.
Not every dev got that memo. In any case, it looks like you're just going to narrow the criteria until you are eventually right. Enjoy.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I love F2P because it is basically an "idiot tax" payment model. I have the self control to play a game and not constantly spend money on stupid cosmetic items so it means those who can't control themselves pay for me. I used to have friends in WoW who paid to change their name every month or were constantly faction or server transferring their toons and I was just baffled at how they could waste money like that. So if those people want to pay for my content then I am all for it. The only time I oppose F2P is when it is pay to win because then it isn't really a game anymore.
WOW is not a F2P or a P2W game. And also it is not a advantage cash shop game... The CS in WOW is only for cosmetics. You cant compare that with a real F2P with a very offensive advantage CS. If you play a game like that without using the CS you will be forced to do terrible boring grinding. And spend more time doing boring things in general. And you will be both less powerful and have terrible gear compared to others that are spending a lot of money. Playing a game like that without paying is a painful waste of time. If you are paying enough to have some fun it is a waste of money instead, IMO. That business model is just bad. For everyone... My choice is to just say "no" and refuse to play games like that.
And in the last sentence I clearly stated that I oppose pay to win games. I don't mind a F2P game if the CS is for cosmetic items only. I only used WoW as an example to show how stupid some people can be with their money and why the business model is viable.
There are a huge number of different business models that call themselves "free to play", and they shouldn't all be lumped in together.
/
This..
I will warn folks that dont already know, yes most f2p games can and will get expensive unless you dont mind endless gold grinding with inferior gear!
For you, based on your playstyle, that is true. For the majority of F2P players, that is false.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by HurvartAnd the companies are in fact exploiting the minority they know will spend crazy money when playing the games. I dont think it is very etical and moral.
So all food companies are unethical and immoral because they are exploiting minority of people having food addiction?
I do not think so.
Yes, it is a kind of self control - you posses a willpower to resist the temptation but lack willpower to stop.
And the companies are in fact exploiting the minority they know will spend crazy money when playing the games. I dont think it is very etical and moral.
So all food companies are unethical and immoral because they are exploiting minority of people having food addiction?
I do not think so.
Yes, it is a kind of self control - you posses a willpower to resist the temptation but lack willpower to stop.
Do you not understand...today no one is responsible for their own actions it is always someone forcing them, tricking them, or their parents just screwed them up and it made them do it.
Bleh. I don't like f2p because I am broke, I like f2p because I don't feel like I am tied to a specific game. I can mix and match and try a lot of games out, and don't have to quit one to play another.
Further evidence that the F2P model creates a transient non-investing fickle player base.
Bleh. I don't like f2p because I am broke, I like f2p because I don't feel like I am tied to a specific game. I can mix and match and try a lot of games out, and don't have to quit one to play another.
Further evidence that the F2P model creates a transient non-investing fickle player base.
It really is bad for MMORPGs on so many levels.
Creates it? If the devs are the greedy evil corporate suits that they are portrayed as, then wouldn't it make more sense that the playerbase not only was pre-existing but large enough that the business model was changed to fit how they choose to pay/play?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There are a huge number of different business models that call themselves "free to play", and they shouldn't all be lumped in together.
/
This..
Double this... F2p is just a wide category with a whole bunch of business models, and they are so different (and changing constantly) that it's hard to keep a decent debate over it. Even if you narrow down the topic for only a few games which has similar f2p models, there are still the actual players whit their differencies.
Like for the title ("f2p is expensive"), and narrowing it to LotRO (because of Chilliesauce's question about non-restricting games) :
if you're a former player (vip -> premium) and don't care about pvmp it's totally free to play (if you wanna pvmp, vip is a must...)
if you're a newcomer, and don't have a problem with grinding, it's free as well
if you don't like grind, well, then yep, it could be expensive after Lone Lands...
And we could make this list on every single f2p models out there - a very long list would it be what's with EVE, not even a f2p title, but you can play it totally free with plex...
so basically, f2p's are expensive? depends on a lot of things...
And the companies are in fact exploiting the minority they know will spend crazy money when playing the games. I dont think it is very etical and moral.
So all food companies are unethical and immoral because they are exploiting minority of people having food addiction?
I do not think so.
Yes, it is a kind of self control - you posses a willpower to resist the temptation but lack willpower to stop.
Not all food companies. But a food company that is targeting people with food addiction and trying to make them eat the worst possible unhealthy food is unethical IMO. Food that the company knows will make the addiction much worse for those people...
Trying to target and exploit people that have a serious addiction is not etical, IMO. Regardless what type of product it is.
Since I have the willpower to resist the temptation I will be OK. The fact that I know I will not be able to stop if I start makes me even more determined to resist the temptation...
Yep i have to agree with you Op, and that is pretty much exactly how those game are designed, it's all about "your are gimped to death or spend a fuck ton to have great time". There is pretty much no balance, maybe few sub that passed to f2p are a bit better, and let you enjoy the game without this "nothing or everything" aspect, but those games are the exception in the f2p model.
I don't buy any of the arguments some people here are pointing, "you have to control" "its your fault" " you did your choice" 'you spend what you want spend", even if they are true they are just half true. That would be true if those games weren't meant to push you to have the opposite behavior. They know a very small part will spend but will spend a lot, so they abuse this to the maximum. The gap between to free players and those paying is just huge and you can't really be aware of it before you actually spend quiet some money, and understand all the tricks. I really think you need to try both side of the fence to understand this, actually someone that never spend anything is totally biased, and have seen nothing of the game they play, it's like 2 games in one. Most of the people that never spend a crap will give those silly advises, but they use those advise more to forbid themselves to spend than to spend rationally, because those games are not mean to make you spend rationally, well most aren't. So ye maybe 90% will never pay a crap but first they are pretty much non factor, sorry to put is so blandly, they do make the game alive though, second they really don't know the game much, most of the time the best part is just forbidden access to them.
In any case for someone spending they are really expensive, and for someone that don't pay, they are probably a lot less interesting than they should, whatever those playing for free think. Once more if i had a single example of a game that let you spend a small amount per month and give you pretty much the best the game have, then i would support such model, but i have yet to see one. Those models don't offer you that, quiet the contrary, just check any cash shop and see the price tag on any of those virtual item, they are so fucking expensive, this by itself prove my point.
I still have to play a game which restricted me once i upgraded to gold or platinum in F2P titles. I haven't come across any so far. Mind giving me an example? maybe i missed something?
LOTRO.
Let me guess... expansions don't count?
So are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? because i ahve been tryign to draw parallels between B2P and P2P models. In both models you pay for expansions.
By the way by restriction i meant that the content that is already paid for before games goes F2P and not the future expansions.
Not every dev got that memo. In any case, it looks like you're just going to narrow the criteria until you are eventually right. Enjoy.
I am talkign about standard practise yes there are games for example like EVE but it is more like an exception not a norm. And i thought were just discussing different viewpoints? i didn't know that it was a content to win or something.
Bleh. I don't like f2p because I am broke, I like f2p because I don't feel like I am tied to a specific game. I can mix and match and try a lot of games out, and don't have to quit one to play another.
Further evidence that the F2P model creates a transient non-investing fickle player base.
It really is bad for MMORPGs on so many levels.
Creates it? If the devs are the greedy evil corporate suits that they are portrayed as, then wouldn't it make more sense that the playerbase not only was pre-existing but large enough that the business model was changed to fit how they choose to pay/play?
No, a payment model can obviously change player culture. Anyone watching the industry (REALLY watching) can tell you this.
With nothing invested, either finanicially or emotionally, means a game is easy to jump in and then leave just as quickly.
Originally posted by Hurvart Not all food companies. But a food company that is targeting people with food addiction and trying to make them eat the worst possible unhealthy food is unethical IMO. Food that the company knows will make the addiction much worse for those people...
I can only quote:
Originally posted by Ausare today no one is responsible for their own actions it is always someone forcing them, tricking them, or their parents just screwed them up and it made them do it.
Unless you are irresponsible being, do not drag other people into it. No one else is responsible for your addiction but you.
Actually, it does. A lot of stuff gets invented and marketed as "you need to have", creating a demand after there is a supply.
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
I love F2P because it is basically an "idiot tax" payment model. I have the self control to play a game and not constantly spend money on stupid cosmetic items so it means those who can't control themselves pay for me. I used to have friends in WoW who paid to change their name every month or were constantly faction or server transferring their toons and I was just baffled at how they could waste money like that. So if those people want to pay for my content then I am all for it. The only time I oppose F2P is when it is pay to win because then it isn't really a game anymore.
WOW is not a F2P or a P2W game. And also it is not a advantage cash shop game... The CS in WOW is only for cosmetics. You cant compare that with a real F2P with a very offensive advantage CS. If you play a game like that without using the CS you will be forced to do terrible boring grinding. And spend more time doing boring things in general. And you will be both less powerful and have terrible gear compared to others that are spending a lot of money. Playing a game like that without paying is a painful waste of time. If you are paying enough to have some fun it is a waste of money instead, IMO. That business model is just bad. For everyone... My choice is to just say "no" and refuse to play games like that.
I think WoW is the worse example of a payment model.
No idea how it is atm, but last time i played was:
- Buy the client to acess the game.
- Pay each month if we want play it.
- Buy the new expansion if we want to acess to new stuff.
- Buy in cash shop if we want "loking cool" stuff.
Originally posted by VesaviusTell that to Apple.You are being naive.Marketing is as much about creating demand as it is meeting it.
If you actually believe that Apple did not hit what people wanted and fell in love with but instead made a product and then made people to want it and love it...I am not the naive one here
No. It depends solely on 1 thing - how much you spend on the game.
Also, there are no "many" F2P models, there is 1 model only - no fee upfront.
Just stop twisting terms to suit your bias, perception or wishes.
"how much you spend on the game." true, everything is expensive only, when you spend too much on it
"there is 1 model only - no fee upfront." well, here i need to argue... and not because i'm twisting terms
so you say, wow, aoc, lotro and sto are all have the same model, because they don't have upfront fees.
Only in wow you can play to lvl20 then you have to pay; in aoc you can choose from only 4 classes, with a lot of restrictions so it's more reasonable to subscribe; in lotro it's easier to pay but you can play without it; and finally in sto you don't need to pay at all, you can play it for free.
I don't think they're the same model when we talk about the expensive factor. They all give you different choices and push you towards spending in different ways.
True, you don't have to spend a dime, if you don't want. (in wow's case it's also means stop playing, but hey, at least it was free until it lasted ).
Marketing is as much about creating demand as it is meeting it.
If you actually believe that Apple did not hit what people actually wanted and fell in love with but made a product and then made people to want it and love it...I am not the naive one here
OK, fine, you know it all. I have no need to educate you in Marketing 101. Believe what you will.
Do yourself a favour though and Google 'Marketing creating demand' and have a read.
Comments
So are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? because i ahve been tryign to draw parallels between B2P and P2P models. In both models you pay for expansions.
By the way by restriction i meant that the content that is already paid for before games goes F2P and not the future expansions.
WOW is not a F2P or a P2W game. And also it is not a advantage cash shop game... The CS in WOW is only for cosmetics. You cant compare that with a real F2P with a very offensive advantage CS. If you play a game like that without using the CS you will be forced to do terrible boring grinding. And spend more time doing boring things in general. And you will be both less powerful and have terrible gear compared to others that are spending a lot of money. Playing a game like that without paying is a painful waste of time. If you are paying enough to have some fun it is a waste of money instead, IMO. That business model is just bad. For everyone... My choice is to just say "no" and refuse to play games like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Heh, heh. When the term "Free to Play" is used it is what I would call weasel words.
Not every dev got that memo. In any case, it looks like you're just going to narrow the criteria until you are eventually right. Enjoy.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
And in the last sentence I clearly stated that I oppose pay to win games. I don't mind a F2P game if the CS is for cosmetic items only. I only used WoW as an example to show how stupid some people can be with their money and why the business model is viable.
For you, based on your playstyle, that is true. For the majority of F2P players, that is false.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
So all food companies are unethical and immoral because they are exploiting minority of people having food addiction?
I do not think so.
Yes, it is a kind of self control - you posses a willpower to resist the temptation but lack willpower to stop.
Or you could actually make a research on what F2P means instead of projecting what you "think" F2P should mean...
Do you not understand...today no one is responsible for their own actions it is always someone forcing them, tricking them, or their parents just screwed them up and it made them do it.
Further evidence that the F2P model creates a transient non-investing fickle player base.
It really is bad for MMORPGs on so many levels.
Creates it? If the devs are the greedy evil corporate suits that they are portrayed as, then wouldn't it make more sense that the playerbase not only was pre-existing but large enough that the business model was changed to fit how they choose to pay/play?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Double this... F2p is just a wide category with a whole bunch of business models, and they are so different (and changing constantly) that it's hard to keep a decent debate over it. Even if you narrow down the topic for only a few games which has similar f2p models, there are still the actual players whit their differencies.
Like for the title ("f2p is expensive"), and narrowing it to LotRO (because of Chilliesauce's question about non-restricting games) :
And we could make this list on every single f2p models out there - a very long list would it be what's with EVE, not even a f2p title, but you can play it totally free with plex...
so basically, f2p's are expensive? depends on a lot of things...
Not all food companies. But a food company that is targeting people with food addiction and trying to make them eat the worst possible unhealthy food is unethical IMO. Food that the company knows will make the addiction much worse for those people...
Trying to target and exploit people that have a serious addiction is not etical, IMO. Regardless what type of product it is.
Since I have the willpower to resist the temptation I will be OK. The fact that I know I will not be able to stop if I start makes me even more determined to resist the temptation...
No. It depends solely on 1 thing - how much you spend on the game.
Also, there are no "many" F2P models, there is 1 model only - no fee upfront.
Just stop twisting terms to suit your bias, perception or wishes.
Yep i have to agree with you Op, and that is pretty much exactly how those game are designed, it's all about "your are gimped to death or spend a fuck ton to have great time". There is pretty much no balance, maybe few sub that passed to f2p are a bit better, and let you enjoy the game without this "nothing or everything" aspect, but those games are the exception in the f2p model.
I don't buy any of the arguments some people here are pointing, "you have to control" "its your fault" " you did your choice" 'you spend what you want spend", even if they are true they are just half true. That would be true if those games weren't meant to push you to have the opposite behavior. They know a very small part will spend but will spend a lot, so they abuse this to the maximum. The gap between to free players and those paying is just huge and you can't really be aware of it before you actually spend quiet some money, and understand all the tricks. I really think you need to try both side of the fence to understand this, actually someone that never spend anything is totally biased, and have seen nothing of the game they play, it's like 2 games in one. Most of the people that never spend a crap will give those silly advises, but they use those advise more to forbid themselves to spend than to spend rationally, because those games are not mean to make you spend rationally, well most aren't. So ye maybe 90% will never pay a crap but first they are pretty much non factor, sorry to put is so blandly, they do make the game alive though, second they really don't know the game much, most of the time the best part is just forbidden access to them.
In any case for someone spending they are really expensive, and for someone that don't pay, they are probably a lot less interesting than they should, whatever those playing for free think. Once more if i had a single example of a game that let you spend a small amount per month and give you pretty much the best the game have, then i would support such model, but i have yet to see one. Those models don't offer you that, quiet the contrary, just check any cash shop and see the price tag on any of those virtual item, they are so fucking expensive, this by itself prove my point.
I am talkign about standard practise yes there are games for example like EVE but it is more like an exception not a norm. And i thought were just discussing different viewpoints? i didn't know that it was a content to win or something.
No, a payment model can obviously change player culture. Anyone watching the industry (REALLY watching) can tell you this.
With nothing invested, either finanicially or emotionally, means a game is easy to jump in and then leave just as quickly.
I can only quote:
Unless you are irresponsible being, do not drag other people into it. No one else is responsible for your addiction but you.
Oh, I wish I had a business creating my customers. Tell me the secret please...
You know...where is no demand, there is no supply. It does not work vice-versa.
Tell that to Apple.
You are being naive.
Marketing is as much about creating demand as it is meeting it.
Actually, it does. A lot of stuff gets invented and marketed as "you need to have", creating a demand after there is a supply.
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high
And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll
Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde
And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
I think WoW is the worse example of a payment model.
No idea how it is atm, but last time i played was:
- Buy the client to acess the game.
- Pay each month if we want play it.
- Buy the new expansion if we want to acess to new stuff.
- Buy in cash shop if we want "loking cool" stuff.
Please, dont tell me this is OK model.
If you actually believe that Apple did not hit what people wanted and fell in love with but instead made a product and then made people to want it and love it...I am not the naive one here
"how much you spend on the game." true, everything is expensive only, when you spend too much on it
"there is 1 model only - no fee upfront." well, here i need to argue... and not because i'm twisting terms
so you say, wow, aoc, lotro and sto are all have the same model, because they don't have upfront fees.
Only in wow you can play to lvl20 then you have to pay; in aoc you can choose from only 4 classes, with a lot of restrictions so it's more reasonable to subscribe; in lotro it's easier to pay but you can play without it; and finally in sto you don't need to pay at all, you can play it for free.
I don't think they're the same model when we talk about the expensive factor. They all give you different choices and push you towards spending in different ways.
True, you don't have to spend a dime, if you don't want. (in wow's case it's also means stop playing, but hey, at least it was free until it lasted ).
OK, fine, you know it all. I have no need to educate you in Marketing 101. Believe what you will.
Do yourself a favour though and Google 'Marketing creating demand' and have a read.